CVE-2024-52017
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedNetgear XR300 v1.0.3.78 was discovered to contain a stack overflow via the passphrase parameter at bridge_wireless_main.cgi. This vulnerability allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via a crafted POST request.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Netgear XR300 router firmware v1.0.3.78. The vulnerability is located in the bridge_wireless_main.cgi endpoint, where the passphrase parameter in a POST request does not properly validate input length before copying it to a fixed-size stack buffer. This allows an attacker to overwrite stack memory by sending an oversized payload, causing the device to crash and resulting in a Denial of Service.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 1.0.3.78CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm device model is Netgear XR300Access the router web interface and check the device model in the status/dashboard page, or log into the router via SSH and run 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' or check the label on the deviceAffected if The device model is not Netgear XR300
-
Verify firmware version is exactly 1.0.3.78In the router web interface, go to Administration > Firmware Update or Router Status page and check the current firmware version displayedAffected if Firmware version is not 1.0.3.78 (the vulnerability affects only this specific version)
-
Confirm the web management interface is accessibleAttempt to access the router's web interface at the default gateway IP (typically 192.168.1.1) from a browser. Check if bridge_wireless_main.cgi responds to requestsAffected if The web interface is unreachable or the bridge_wireless_main.cgi endpoint does not exist or respond
-
Check if remote administration is enabledIn the router web interface, go to Advanced > Remote Management and verify if 'Enable Remote Management' or similar option is turned onAffected if Remote administration is enabled, making the vulnerable endpoint accessible from external networks
You are affected if you have a Netgear XR300 router running firmware version 1.0.3.78 with its web management interface accessible, especially if remote administration is enabled.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the latest Netgear firmware update for the XR300 model when available. As an interim control, restrict access to the device's web management interface to trusted networks or disable remote administration entirely.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-52017 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-52017 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data